 |
|
Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Combat Mission (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Thread: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? (/showthread.php?tid=41435) |
Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Copper - 07-18-2007 Here is a quick poll. There has been a great deal of griping by some (not naming names) about the Blitz ladder not being one that is worthy of playing on. I say different. For many, the ladder is nothing more than a place to record your games. For others (preening stuffed shirt peacocks who love to admire there stats... like me!), the ELO function of the Blitz ladders makes it a great tool for gauging the relative levels of players, and helps immensely in choosing opponents. I for one, think the ELO ladder is the true Blitz ladder. No offence to others who do not, to each his own, and the beautiful thing about the blitz. Do you think the ELO ladder is the 'true' ladder with respect to scores? (for a quick reminder, the ELO function works like the chess scoring system, where a player with higher scores do not gain from victories over lower scored players as much as higher scored players. Therefore, it forces the higher players to play higher players to improve in the rankings. It also means a loss to a lower scored player can be devestating to the score, and moves incentives away from playing lower ranked players. The incentive systems are fraught with many challenges, many of which have been already been pointed out, but feel free to comment on them, there may be some we have missed) Cheers! Leto RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Chipmunk - 07-18-2007 Yes I think so too. Whenever I go to the ladder the first thing I do is re-order it by ELO ranking. I know the ELO system isn't perfect and doesn't take into account things like scenario balance but it still gives a good indication of player skill. Look at all the guys near the top when its sorted by ELO, they are all excellent players. RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - herroberst - 07-18-2007 I admit I do not pay that much attention to the rankings bit. The ELO description was interesting. I am on the "front page, 5th down" in terms of games played but many pages down by ELO ranking. I do play new guys when they post a challenge sometimes offering advice or otherwise mentoring. Many of them kick my butt in the game, especially the ones that want Italy '43 flat terrain they get tigers and I dont' kind of games... but I see it as a challenge. Maybe I should start challenging by ELO ranking. RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - bluehand - 07-18-2007 I didn't even know what ELO ranking meant until a couple months ago. I always challenged based on who had posted a challenge and on who sounded battle smart in their posts. Noobs who sound like they just figured out how the game worked I stayed away from. and until recently I thought clickies meant they had a good rep as a good opponent and reliable player. little did I know they were free... RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - bluehand - 07-18-2007 also to use the SA, A, N, D, SD system of polling you really should use a statement not a question. RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Copper - 07-18-2007 The ELO system is flawed when used with any game outside of Chess. Chess is the most balanced wargame there is, nothing else can compare. The ELO ratings were based on this premises, using them in other gaming societies, the balance factor is removed and thus it only become a relative stat like W/L/D or winning %. A true skill rating will be impossible to calibrate with all the variants of the different gaming systems. Now you do increase your ELO ratings by playing higher level rated players, but you also increase your ELO by winning games, even against sub par level rated players. All you have to do is win to gain, albeit a smaller gain, but still a gain. The luxury of another type of stat to measure one's skills against another will always be on someone's project list :) I chose the middle road, ELO is a good stat to use, but not the only one that determines the skills of a player. RE:��Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Copper - 07-18-2007 RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - Fubar - 07-18-2007 
RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - raz_atoth - 07-18-2007 RedDevil Wrote:The luxury of another type of stat to measure one's skills against another will always be on someone's project list :)Oh,boy...Why do i have the feeling i know who this 'unlucky' guy is? :smoke: Perhaps because i keep seeing his face everytime i look in the mirror? :whis: RE: Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities? - jawsconan - 07-18-2007 Hi, Althought i already formulated my opinion on the ELO parameter, i repeat again that i totally agree with you PETE. ELO parameter is the best parameter to rank and have a look on opponent's level on a progressive way. the number of games played reflects only the free time everyone as to play CM. For exemple, as far as i am concerned, i really can't play any game actually and until september because of work movings. But my only desire is to reach this date to play again CM ! I can't imagine stopping to play CM a day. It is so intense and complete. But no time to play CM = no score increase = bad score rank. cheers. Hubert |
){kind=link}